We’re told that a development announcement for a new EF 800mm f/5.6L IS II can be expected in the fall/late summer. There was even a suggestion that the current version is no longer in production. There was no mention of when that may have ended, nor can we confirm that piece of information.

We’ve heard previously that a new 800mm was coming and that Canon will be moving it to the new lightweight materials used in the latest versions of the 300,400, 500 and 600mm lenses. There would also be other improvements in optics, autofocus and IS.

If it does come this fall/late summer, expect it before Photokina starts in September.

The 300-600 MkII supertele lenses were something like 18 months from development announcement to launch. Hopefully Canon can do better...

Lets hope that was in part due to getting new materials into a production ready state - which has already been done, so let's hope this one is faster.

From a spec point of view, an optical refresh so it outperforms the 600/4 with the 1.4x TC wouldn't go amiss, together with less weight than it's predecessor. And what about an integrated 1.4x TC like the 200-400 has? An 800/5.6 switchable to a 1120/8 at the flick of a switch?

I presently own a 300 mm lens f/4 which I find very sharp. For birding in the summer I’m out on my boat and am able to shoot ducks & eagles. I think the 600 f/4 would more than supple what I need for shooting. This is a nice addition the 800 f/5.6 to the canon lenses but something I can’t afford.

Purely from a technology capability standpoint, I wonder if it's possible to get the same lens + 2X converter performance with an 800mm lens, that photographers are getting with the 300 f2.8 + 2X converter.

Purely from a technology capability standpoint, I wonder if it's possible to get the same lens + 2X converter performance with an 800mm lens, than photographers are getting with the 300 f2.8 + 2X converter.

Yes, I do know the 1.4X converter delivers better results.

I'd have thought that in theory it would be. Having results which look great wide open with the 2x on a ~20MP body would indicate that the bare lens or even lens + 1.4x would look great wide open with a possible future high MP body.

Other than an indicator of the quality of the lens, I can't see much call for using an f5.6 lens with a 2x TC myself. The resulting f11 lens wouldn't AF on any body (excluding DPAF), and it doesn't leave you many options in terms of apertures for maximum detail due to diffraction.

As a small bird enthusiast, the MFD will need to come down to compete w the 600II + 1.4X (4.5m). The current 800 MFD is 6m but prior super tele II's cut about 1m off MFD. So, if it has a built in 1.4X and an MFD of 5m plus lowered weight (4 kg) and a little better optics (better than 600II + 1.4X III, esp w the built-in 1.4X), I will buy one.

I was going to say that it would add too much weight, but the 1.4xTC is only 8oz, and if the 800MkII follows the same weight pattern that the MkI did relative to the 500MkI, the 800MkII with TC would still come out lighter than the 600MkII.And putting that extra weight on the back probably would make it more balanced.

Other than an indicator of the quality of the lens, I can't see much call for using an f5.6 lens with a 2x TC myself. The resulting f11 lens wouldn't AF on any body (excluding DPAF), and it doesn't leave you many options in terms of apertures for maximum detail due to diffraction.

On that subject, the other day I was wondering if they couldn't incorporate Contrast Detect AF at the same time as using Phase Detect AF in an SLR design? All they would have to do is lay a few stripes of pixels somewhere in either the optical path of the AF sensor or even the viewfinder, and everything would function normally except with the added Contrast Detect AF.Alternatively they could just put single pixel wide slots in the AF mirror (or both, a few microscopic lines in the viewfinder wouldn't kill its functionality) so that some light that would have gone to the AF sensor just hits the main sensor instead, and they could put colourless microlenses in just those spots to improve light gathering. The only downside to using pixels on the imaging sensor itself is I have noticed more sensor noise when using live view. If a sensor has the capability to activate and read only select lines of pixels (or individual pixels) I guess that would be fine.

If you put hybrid AF in an SLR then a person could seamlessly continue to use AF at any aperture they want (in the case of flipping a TC on during use), it would potentially improve AF accuracy overall, and could even auto correct AF calibration.